Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a rare but highly aggressive malignancy that includes intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and gallbladder cancer (GBC). While BTC has a low global incidence, its regional variations are notable. Among nations, Korea has the second-highest incidence of BTC globally, with the highest mortality rate worldwide, underscoring the need for a deeper understanding of this cancer. Liver fluke infection and hepatitis B virus infection are key risk factors unique to Korea, contributing to regional differences in BTC incidence. Additionally, genomic alterations in Korean patients with BTC differ from those in other populations, including lower frequencies of IDH1 mutations and FGFR2 fusions in ICC and a higher prevalence of ERBB2 amplification in GBC. Recognizing the clinical significance of these alterations, ivosidenib and pemigatinib have been approved in Korea for BTC patients with IDH1 mutations and FGFR2 fusions, respectively. This review explores the epidemiology, risk factors, and molecular features of BTC, along with corresponding targeted therapies. Furthermore, we compare the unique characteristics of BTC in Korea with global data to inform future research and clinical practice.

The impact of Streptococcus pneumoniae coinfection on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prognosis remains uncertain. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who underwent a pneumococcal urinary antigen (PUA) test to assess its clinical utility. Results showed that PUA-positive patients required more oxygen support, high-flow nasal cannula, and dexamethasone compared to PUA-negative patients.Furthermore, the significantly higher incidence of a National Early Warning Score ≥5 in the PUA-positive group (P<0.001) suggests that a positive PUA test is associated with a severe disease course. However, no significant difference in mortality was observed between the two groups, and antibiotics were used in almost all patients (96.2%). While the PUA test may help guide antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients, its interpretation should be approached with caution.

The impact of Streptococcus pneumoniae coinfection on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prognosis remains uncertain. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who underwent a pneumococcal urinary antigen (PUA) test to assess its clinical utility. Results showed that PUA-positive patients required more oxygen support, high-flow nasal cannula, and dexamethasone compared to PUA-negative patients.Furthermore, the significantly higher incidence of a National Early Warning Score ≥5 in the PUA-positive group (P<0.001) suggests that a positive PUA test is associated with a severe disease course. However, no significant difference in mortality was observed between the two groups, and antibiotics were used in almost all patients (96.2%). While the PUA test may help guide antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients, its interpretation should be approached with caution.

Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a rare but highly aggressive malignancy that includes intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and gallbladder cancer (GBC). While BTC has a low global incidence, its regional variations are notable. Among nations, Korea has the second-highest incidence of BTC globally, with the highest mortality rate worldwide, underscoring the need for a deeper understanding of this cancer. Liver fluke infection and hepatitis B virus infection are key risk factors unique to Korea, contributing to regional differences in BTC incidence. Additionally, genomic alterations in Korean patients with BTC differ from those in other populations, including lower frequencies of IDH1 mutations and FGFR2 fusions in ICC and a higher prevalence of ERBB2 amplification in GBC. Recognizing the clinical significance of these alterations, ivosidenib and pemigatinib have been approved in Korea for BTC patients with IDH1 mutations and FGFR2 fusions, respectively. This review explores the epidemiology, risk factors, and molecular features of BTC, along with corresponding targeted therapies. Furthermore, we compare the unique characteristics of BTC in Korea with global data to inform future research and clinical practice.

The impact of Streptococcus pneumoniae coinfection on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) prognosis remains uncertain. We conducted a retrospective analysis of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 who underwent a pneumococcal urinary antigen (PUA) test to assess its clinical utility. Results showed that PUA-positive patients required more oxygen support, high-flow nasal cannula, and dexamethasone compared to PUA-negative patients.Furthermore, the significantly higher incidence of a National Early Warning Score ≥5 in the PUA-positive group (P<0.001) suggests that a positive PUA test is associated with a severe disease course. However, no significant difference in mortality was observed between the two groups, and antibiotics were used in almost all patients (96.2%). While the PUA test may help guide antibiotic use in COVID-19 patients, its interpretation should be approached with caution.

Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is a rare but highly aggressive malignancy that includes intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and gallbladder cancer (GBC). While BTC has a low global incidence, its regional variations are notable. Among nations, Korea has the second-highest incidence of BTC globally, with the highest mortality rate worldwide, underscoring the need for a deeper understanding of this cancer. Liver fluke infection and hepatitis B virus infection are key risk factors unique to Korea, contributing to regional differences in BTC incidence. Additionally, genomic alterations in Korean patients with BTC differ from those in other populations, including lower frequencies of IDH1 mutations and FGFR2 fusions in ICC and a higher prevalence of ERBB2 amplification in GBC. Recognizing the clinical significance of these alterations, ivosidenib and pemigatinib have been approved in Korea for BTC patients with IDH1 mutations and FGFR2 fusions, respectively. This review explores the epidemiology, risk factors, and molecular features of BTC, along with corresponding targeted therapies. Furthermore, we compare the unique characteristics of BTC in Korea with global data to inform future research and clinical practice.

Purpose: This study examined the evaluation indicators and frameworks for assessing the effectiveness of the Center for Children’s and Social Welfare Foodservice Management. Methods: A qualitative research design was used, including focus group discussions and indepth interviews cond1ucted with 26 stakeholders, such as center staff, community nutrition experts, and performance evaluation specialists. The interviews were recorded with the participants’ consent, and the transcribed data were analyzed using framework analysis to identify key patterns. Results: The findings highlight several critical issues in the current evaluation framework, including over-reliance on satisfaction surveys, insufficient utilization of checklist data, and a lack of long-term outcome measures. The participants recommended improving satisfaction surveys by diversifying the respondents and refining methodologies. Systematic data management was also highlighted as essential, particularly for data collected by center nutritionists during site visits. These data are crucial for evaluating the effectiveness of overseeing and educating cooks and staff in children’s and social welfare facilities. For the long-term outcome indicators, the participants suggested integrating national health datasets to monitor the food consumption patterns, such as fruit and vegetable intake or sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among children, and tracking medical expenses or hospitalization rates for elderly daycare center users. Well-designed intervention studies were recommended to develop more robust evaluation indicators, particularly for assessing the impact of the centers on the health and quality of life of the elderly. Conclusion Therefore, comprehensive and standardized evaluation systems should be implemented to enhance operational efficiency and service quality. The proposed evaluation scheme can better evaluate and support the health and well-being of vulnerable populations, including children, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities, by aligning these systems with the centers’ mission of ensuring safe and nutritious food services.

Background: Solid-organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) receiving immunosuppressive therapy are expected to have worse clinical outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, published studies have shown mixed results, depending on adjustment for important confounders such as age, variants, and vaccination status. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected the data on 7,327 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from two tertiary hospitals with government-designated COVID-19 regional centers. We compared clinical outcomes between SOTRs and non-SOTRs by a propensity score-matched analysis (1:2) based on age, gender, and the date of COVID-19 diagnosis. We also performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis to adjust other important confounders such as vaccination status and the Charlson comorbidity index. Results: After matching, SOTRs (n=83) had a significantly higher risk of high-flow nasal cannula use, mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, and a composite of COVID-19 severity outcomes than non-SOTRs (n=160) (all P <0.05). The National Early Warning Score was significantly higher in SOTRs than in non-SOTRs from day 1 to 7 of hospitalization ( P for interaction=0.008 by generalized estimating equation). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, SOTRs (odds ratio [OR], 2.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–4.11) and male gender (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.26– 5.45) were associated with worse outcomes, and receiving two to three doses of COVID-19 vaccine (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24–0.79) was associated with better outcomes. Conclusion Hospitalized SOTRs with COVID-19 had a worse prognosis than non-SOTRs. COVID-19 vaccination should be implemented appropriately to prevent severe COVID-19 progression in this population.

Background: Solid-organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) receiving immunosuppressive therapy are expected to have worse clinical outcomes from coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, published studies have shown mixed results, depending on adjustment for important confounders such as age, variants, and vaccination status. Materials and Methods: We retrospectively collected the data on 7,327 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 from two tertiary hospitals with government-designated COVID-19 regional centers. We compared clinical outcomes between SOTRs and non-SOTRs by a propensity score-matched analysis (1:2) based on age, gender, and the date of COVID-19 diagnosis. We also performed a multivariate logistic regression analysis to adjust other important confounders such as vaccination status and the Charlson comorbidity index. Results: After matching, SOTRs (n=83) had a significantly higher risk of high-flow nasal cannula use, mechanical ventilation, acute kidney injury, and a composite of COVID-19 severity outcomes than non-SOTRs (n=160) (all P <0.05). The National Early Warning Score was significantly higher in SOTRs than in non-SOTRs from day 1 to 7 of hospitalization ( P for interaction=0.008 by generalized estimating equation). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, SOTRs (odds ratio [OR], 2.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.12–4.11) and male gender (OR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.26– 5.45) were associated with worse outcomes, and receiving two to three doses of COVID-19 vaccine (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.24–0.79) was associated with better outcomes. Conclusion Hospitalized SOTRs with COVID-19 had a worse prognosis than non-SOTRs. COVID-19 vaccination should be implemented appropriately to prevent severe COVID-19 progression in this population.

Purpose: This study examined the evaluation indicators and frameworks for assessing the effectiveness of the Center for Children’s and Social Welfare Foodservice Management. Methods: A qualitative research design was used, including focus group discussions and indepth interviews cond1ucted with 26 stakeholders, such as center staff, community nutrition experts, and performance evaluation specialists. The interviews were recorded with the participants’ consent, and the transcribed data were analyzed using framework analysis to identify key patterns. Results: The findings highlight several critical issues in the current evaluation framework, including over-reliance on satisfaction surveys, insufficient utilization of checklist data, and a lack of long-term outcome measures. The participants recommended improving satisfaction surveys by diversifying the respondents and refining methodologies. Systematic data management was also highlighted as essential, particularly for data collected by center nutritionists during site visits. These data are crucial for evaluating the effectiveness of overseeing and educating cooks and staff in children’s and social welfare facilities. For the long-term outcome indicators, the participants suggested integrating national health datasets to monitor the food consumption patterns, such as fruit and vegetable intake or sugar-sweetened beverage consumption among children, and tracking medical expenses or hospitalization rates for elderly daycare center users. Well-designed intervention studies were recommended to develop more robust evaluation indicators, particularly for assessing the impact of the centers on the health and quality of life of the elderly. Conclusion Therefore, comprehensive and standardized evaluation systems should be implemented to enhance operational efficiency and service quality. The proposed evaluation scheme can better evaluate and support the health and well-being of vulnerable populations, including children, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities, by aligning these systems with the centers’ mission of ensuring safe and nutritious food services.